Skip to main content

About your Search

20121201
20121231
Search Results 0 to 25 of about 26 (some duplicates have been removed)
supervisor cohen had started to make a motion. it sounds like mr. gibner is giving us a number of options. i think we need to give dpw a chance to think about how this ordinance may be modified. i heard a suggestion also from supervisor cohen to reject the proposal before us as well, but i'd like to know kind of what the wishes of the body is. >> if i were to vote today, i would vote to reject it. we do have an option to continuing to the call of the chair to get more information, but i'm not, i don't have a strong opinion between the two, although it sounds like we don't have a resolution disapproving it before us and so does that mean that we're not capable of rejecting it today? >> you can amend the resolution that's before you to reject and we could work with the department after the meeting to make sure that that -- what the committee is asking for gets into the resolution. it will be a number of changes. like you said, you could make that vote today, take that vote today. >> i'm curious to know what my colleagues think. >> supervisor cohen. >> thank you, i just wanted to reiterate my
. >> amend the resolution as a rejection. >> mr. gibner indicated that the resolution before us to --. >> either up or down. >> is to approve the encroachment. i think it would require a motion to amend the resolution to reject and then to forward that resolution to the board. >> correct. >> so there's a motion -- there is an amendment to the table to reject. are there any objections? so -- and then on the motion itself as amended to reject, are there any objections? >> that would be to forward the amended resolution to the board with a recommendation to adopt it. >> yes. so without objection. thank you. thank you, mr. gibner. miss miller, could you please call item no. 2? >> item no. 2 is a resolution approving the transfer of air space parcel agreements at 15 one-third street. >> thank you, and this item is sponsored by supervisor jane kim. supervisor kim. >> thank you for hearing us today. this is the last piece of the puzzle of a larger process, dialogue and approvals process that has occurred between the city and san francisco museum of modern art to expand the curren
, for this item, or was it the next item, mr. gibner. >> deputy city attorney john gibner. i believe on this item you have written amendments, on the next item you have written aamendments and some additional amendments i'd like to make orally. >> these are not substantive ones that change the numbers and each of you has a copy of them so if there are no questions on those amendments, actually i'm just wondering if my colleagues had any comments. supervisor wiener. >> thank you. thank you, chairman mar for authoring this legislation and for all your work around second hand smoke issues. i'm very supportive of this legislation. we need to have public places where everyone is able to use those places and you don't have some people doing things that make it harder for other people to be there. i think this moves us in that direction. i do have one question for the city attorney, i think the answer is yes but i want to make sure. my reading of the definition of outdoor event, i think would include parklets and i'm curious to know if the city attorney is in agreement. >> deputy city attorney john
and provide a copy of the committee members and mr. gibner, deputy city attorney, is available to go over any substantive items of who is in what category. i do have a summary but it involves things like delete duplicate entries for the redevelopment commission and there is no longer a puc i am available for questions if the committee has any. >> i see no questions. supervisor avalos. >> do we have the commission on community investment infrastructure, is that part of this? >> that is a good question. i don't believe it's required at this point because it doesn't exist yet. the members haven't been seated. >> will it be an oversight if it's not included here. >> what we're planning to do here once the committee is constituted and makes a formal hire of the executive director, we would work to come up with a list of all the positions under the commission and propose trailing legislation that would create a conflict of interest code -- amend the conflict of interest code. >> i note this isn't on as a committee report so is it possible at all that by january we will be able to introduce tho
from mr. gibner. >> two amendments, one is in the numbering. you will see in the draft before you the numbers are 19m.01, 19m.02. we would suggest the committee amend to just make them 19m.1, 19m.2, 19m.3 and second at the end of the draft before you, section 2 includes an operative date. that provision is simply no longer needed because the effective date will be after january 1st, 2013, so we suggest that you delete that. >> thank you. so, colleagues, i just wanted to acknowledge some of the public comments that i am in total agreement that this is a first step and that we need to do much more. my office will be doing our best to convene the coalition of property owners, landlords and tenant organizations to try to put our heads together to make stronger policies in the city. also i want to also just acknowledge the sense of cooperation from the san francisco apartment association, the mission sro collaborative and other tenant groups in this process so i wanted to thank them all for putting a very good piece of legislation together and i urge your support. supervisor wiener.
Search Results 0 to 25 of about 26 (some duplicates have been removed)